There's no reason we can't assume it's just a mode select display, but I like it being a scope for several reasons.

Click to expand...

Me, too. Although it's a bit problematic that our heroes basically never use this feature for targeting! That is, they don't bother to roll up the "vision block", and still they manage to hit their off-boresight victims.

I guess the lack of use could be explained by confidence in one's own abilities (and in one's abilities to predict what the automation will be doing, without having to confirm this beforehand from a screen). And that could apply both to aiming (and auto-aiming) and to mode selecting. Amusingly, when the function is seen used, it's by McCoy, our designated gun klutz (his phaser fails to fire in "Return of the Archons", is accidentally set on kill in ST2 when they board the Regula station, and may well have finished off "Nancy Crater" by accident when he probably would have preferred to stun the beast).

I guess the lack of use could be explained by confidence in one's own abilities (and in one's abilities to predict what the automation will be doing, without having to confirm this beforehand from a screen). And that could apply both to aiming (and auto-aiming) and to mode selecting. Amusingly, when the function is seen used, it's by McCoy, our designated gun klutz (his phaser fails to fire in "Return of the Archons", is accidentally set on kill in ST2 when they board the Regula station, and may well have finished off "Nancy Crater" by accident when he probably would have preferred to stun the beast).

Timo Saloniemi

Click to expand...

This is more or less exactly what I was thinking.

Perhaps the fact that the screen got so little use led to future Starfleet hand phaser designs lacking a targeting screen all together. The movie phasers and the TNG+ phasers all seem to be able to hit targets off bore-sight, and do so without any kind of visual sensor display. I suppose that the addition of an actual video screen sight was ultimately deemed frivolous and was eventually omitted.

The roll up sight was used in several eps, it's just not obvious because they rarely did close ups. Someone has already posted a link to the best cap I know of showing the sight in a deployed position.

If we can make a general-purpose computer with just a touchscreen for tactile input that fits in your pocket in the early 21st century, then in the imaginary 23rd century they can make a weapon which fits in your pocket that can wipe out a battalion, that never misses, and which has a few deceptively simple tactile controls.

I like the raised screen - a lot. Additionally, the idea of AI that assists in "double-click" aiming might not have been thought of in 1967, but it's perfectly in line with what we know today, and meshes well enough with what we saw on the show, in terms of type-1 usage.

The bigger problem in terms of the sight, whatever its nature, is: what happened to it when the type-2 was used?

One might speculate that the Type 2 handle adds not just endurance and penetration power, but also computing power, and its onboard computer is so powerful that all manual aiming becomes unnecessary...

Since the top controls of Type 1 are still perfectly accessible in the combo, I guess the display could be raised, but AFAIK this never happens on screen.

Since the beginning of Star Trek the phasor has has several settings. The light one just knocks you out, and the medium one drills a hole in you and the heavy one pulverizes or annihilates you. The second and third setting blasted an object because the beam came in contact with matter. The object must be represented by the ceramic site at the top whether it is used or not.

We can see Kirk's Phaser-1 attachment on his Phaser-2 is in the "pop-up" sight position as he fires on Crater

Perhaps the reason why a Phaser-1 is required for the Phaser-2 is that the Phaser-1 is the most expensive and difficult to manufacture part? The "smart" electronics and targeting and phaser energy generator reside in the Phaser-1. The Phaser-2 is just a frame that expands heat dissipation and has a large removable power pack. It would be inline with the idea that the TOS movie phasers also continue use a "core" Phaser-1 in the Phaser-2 units IMHO...

We can see Kirk's Phaser-1 attachment on his Phaser-2 is in the "pop-up" sight position as he fires on Crater

Click to expand...

Excellent find, blssdwlf. This thread is giving me a geek rush!

Perhaps the reason why a Phaser-1 is required for the Phaser-2 is that the Phaser-1 is the most expensive and difficult to manufacture part? The "smart" electronics and targeting and phaser energy generator reside in the Phaser-1. The Phaser-2 is just a frame that expands heat dissipation and has a large removable power pack. It would be inline with the idea that the TOS movie phasers also continue use a "core" Phaser-1 in the Phaser-2 units IMHO...

Click to expand...

Yeah, I was thinking something like this, too. There must be an expensive component in the type-1 of some kind, or several even. But in an age of replicators, "expensive" would mean something like "impossible to replicate with ordinary replicators". So, I don't know if the targeting mechanism alone would qualify, but it might if, say, there's some kind of amazing sensor as a part of it.

There was one, solid laser pistol in the beginning. It became someone's idea later to break it into type 1/type 2. The idea was that on diplomatic missions, the crew would have a type 1--a small, easily concealed, non-aggressive looking weapon for use on planets where the native inhabitants might become frightened/offended by the sight of a recognizable sidearm (the type 2). If anyone complained, Kirk could pretend to shave himself with it! lol

Or three pistols in one body, at any rate. A cool idea as such, but the modular approach of the regular episodes was much more dramatic and gave much-needed character to the show. As did the transporter; without those two, plus perhaps the colorful uniforms, the show would have had real difficulty being remembered, let alone becoming iconic.

So, I don't know if the targeting mechanism alone would qualify, but it might if, say, there's some kind of amazing sensor as a part of it.

Click to expand...

The mechanism that produces the actual beam might well sit in Type 1, too. The beam is the most magical part of the weapon, after all, and might rely on a rare substance much like warp drive relies on dilithium.

Makes sense to me. Say the heart of the phaser is a brilliant little gadget that turns the energy from the power source into the phaser beam; for discussion let's call it the "beam generator." The generated beam is then focused and projected to the target.

The desirability of an unobtrusive, easily-concealed weapon that won't offend new acquaintances seems obvious, so the beam generator is built into the smallest package available, Phaser I. But its range and power duration is relatively limited, so for more outright firepower a larger model is called for. Instead of building a different model with its own integral beam generator, why not just use the one from Phaser I? The same basic gadget gets piggybacked on the bigger power supply and more powerful beam emitter of a larger weapon and, voilà, Phaser II.

The difference in range and/or accuracy might be compared to the old snub-nosed .38 and the four- or six-inch-barreled service revolver of last century's US police officers. Same basic technology and ammunition; the little one is good to conceal and for close-up self-defense work, but in a real gunfight the bigger one is a lot better suited.

Imagine Kirk would answer:
Your just about got-it right. Besides holding a battery pack the add-on would provide a carrier medium for a stronger and far lasting beam. Technology has been known to grow very fast, so most everything else is inside Phasor I.